Fun AND good for you - not much else you can say that about these days!
The government may never be able to “think rationally” about the therapeutic properties of hallucinogenic drugs, says Professor David Nutt. The top boffin was speaking on the publication of two new studies that show the anti-depressant qualities of magic mushrooms. Prof Nutt, who was sacked from his role as Blighty's top drug …
The psilocybin is not active until hydrolysed. Stomach acids do this. Hence the 30 - 60 minute delay before onset of "symptoms" and the feeling of having been ripped off if you didn't pick them yourself but bought them. Allegedly.
Apparently if you boil them in water, this will hydrolyse the stuff for you, so when it is imbibed it gets to work right away.
My friend tells me someone he knows would pinch his nose and drink the lot in one go. That way you only taste the last mouthful after you let go of your nose. Even Vimto doesn't render it palatable. Supposedly.
“What's fascinating is that you could think they wouldn't, and of course you're right.”
Prof. Nutt is saying that such unequivocal certainty must be the result of unbalanced and unnatural thought processes.
It's borderline demented gubmint indoctrination: Drugs=Bad which is, demonstrably, bollocks.
This is France we're talking about ... Everything medicinal goes up the bum.
That includes sticking plasters, splints and spectacles in some Arrondissements.
Method of delivery is possibly one reason the regulatory people are squeamish about registering the wonder drug mentioned by Voland's right hand for use in the UK.
The best drug against diarrhea which is prescribed everywhere in Europe for cases of acute dehydration including ones from Norovirus (winter vomiting bug) was developed by the French by taking morphine and playing with it until all nasty bits are gone and only the "constipates" bit is left. It is non-addictive, it has been proven to be clinically safe from kids through adults to geriatrics worldwide to the point where in most of Europe it is available over the counter. It has saved hundreds of thousands of people worldwide.
The only country in Europe which pretends that it does not exist is UK. French + morphine origin. UK approval? You _GOTTA_ _BE_ _KIDDING_...
Sorry, do not have the time to go and peek in my travel kit for the name (I resupply regularly with it when I go to the continent and so do quite a few other people who have to travel to unpleasant places).
What I used to swear by out east was paregoric: camphorated tincture of opium. When I returned to UK in 1972, I was actually able to persuade a pharmacist in the local Boots to make me up a 20 cc bottle of it. Sinc e you only use one drop in about 5 - 10 cc of water for each dose - and you'll only need the one - it lasted quite a long time. Doubt if I could get it now.
Exactly - we used to be given this as kids to treat diarohea. I remember it used to settle off into the two constituent parts in the bottle and you had to shake it up to mix before taking. Tasted like chalk.
In the UK, you can buy loperamide, for pennies from most supermarkets. This too acts upon the morphine receptors in the gut, is safe, non-addictive and has relatively few side effects. I'm not sure what drug you are talking about, but loperamide works fine, and is non-prescription.
and is available over the counter is the UK, they sell it in petrol stations.
Imodium is the brand name in the UK.
Back to the mushrooms. The ban something that grows naturally is quite abusrb, nobody has ever been hurt by magic mushrooms. There are plenty of mushrooms out there that can kill you but they are not banned. The magic ones however are banned. This makes no sense at all.
You cant get addicted to mushrooms, it is simply not possible as anyone who has taken the will confirm.
Do reacreational concerns then it mattters not what the government ban and dont ban, people will continue to ignore them in any case. That war on drugs that they have been waging for sometime does not appear to have made much progress.
The sad thing is that when a clinical reaosn is found to help people with a real problem, they wont hear of it. I dont think that goverments are qualified or approriate to make medical decisions.
"Addictive" is a moveable feast (which is one trick the prohibitionist lobby use to scare the public ...). There are different elements of "addiction", none of which the average man in the street knows about.
Food is physically addictive. Without it, you die.
Nicotine is physically and psychologically addictive. It's continued use can be shown to create physiological changes which cause the body to react to withdrawal. Same for alcohol.
Cannabis is, if anything, psyychologically addictive. Users like it, but withdrawal causes no appreciable physiological effect.
I'm not a pharmakineticist, but would hazard that psilocybin is not addictive in any meaningful sense of the word.
Of course the real question which gets dodged, should be "what, if any, are the risks of addiction".
Personally I am sick to the back teeth of the shite science peddled in the name of the "war on drugs", by a hypocritical government. My wife is addicted to benzodiazepienes, thanks to doctors (who would knock a spliff out of your hand) dishing them out like smarties. And when I say "addicted" I mean it. Sudden withdrawal runs a very real risk of death.
There was a very good article in the Graniud a few years ago, posing the very good question: "Why is it so bad to get high ?". It asked why doctors are so scared to use medicines which get you high, when they are happy to prescribe medicines which can make your life hell (anyone on Chemo will know). Nauseau, drowsiness, digestion problems, headaches, hair loss, libido loss ....
In my opinion, it's because, before WW1 they would, for a price, come round the house and exorcise the wife and rid her of excess anxieties etc. by causing her to release the pent-up vapours that are the result of not being able to ejaculate. These were released during "hysterical paroxysms", brought about by all manner of patented inventions that bear a striking resemblance to today's vibrators.
They were a bit embarrassed about that, pissing on your shoes and telling you its raining.
Anyway, the fundamental issue for me is one of liberty. I do not see a need nor a right to prohibit consenting adults in private from doing whatever they choose.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020